That Cross Country Flight You Just Took Emitted as Much Carbon as the Rest of Your Life

OK, well maybe not that much, but if you're the average resident of the United States it was just under 15% of your entire carbon emissions for the year. And it pretty much negated a whole slew of other steps you've taken to make your life greener.

It's tough green love time here on Planet Green, so let's take a look at it in more detail. I'll use myself as an example:

Flying from New York to San Francisco = 2.5 Tons of Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Let's say I want to go visit friends in San Francisco for a while, spend some time tasting wines in Russian River, and in general get a chance of scenery from my home in New York City, the quickest method of getting there is obviously flying.

So I board a plane at JFK airport and a few hours later, after an entirely uneventful flight, land in San Francisco. After a few weeks on the west coast I board another flight and repeat the experience home, this time delayed at SFO until the wee hours of the morning because of weather on the other side of the country.

Those two flights, in their nearly 6,000 miles of airtime, emitted about 5,000 pounds of greenhouse gas emissions — or so a number of different carbon calculators tell me.

Yikes! Based on average US per capita carbon emissions that's about 15% of my emissions for the year, as I already said, BUT... since I live in New York City, in what to the average American is a glorified walk-in closet, consume a miniscule amount of electricity, and walk or take the subway everywhere my personal carbon footprint is well below that national average. So that one flight is really an even greater part of my overall carbon footprint.

And That Flight Just Cancelled Out...

In fact that flight emitted as much carbon in its scant hours in the air as I saved by following a number of the steps I consistently recommend both here on Planet Green and over on TreeHugger.

It negated the savings from nearly a year of greener eating, for example:

I follow what comes out to a 75% vegan diet — I know this because I'm currently keeping track of every thing I eat or drink (obsessive, yes) — I eat a small amount of dairy and don't eat eggs. Because of that, compared to the average American's meat-heavy diet, my carbon footprint is reduced by about 1.5 tons.

It turns out I'm eating about two-thirds organic and/or locally produced foods right now, so that reduces my personal carbon footprint even more.

I also am signed up for a green power program with my utility, which reduces my carbon footprint (using average stats from the state of New York, not my own, here) by about 6,500 pounds. If I was the average American in my electricity usage, that'd be about 14,000 pounds.

So, in my case, that one flight canceled out nearly a year's worth of carbon savings from switching to green power.

I also take to heart many of the simple green stepswe're constantly advocating: All my lights have CFLs in them; I wash all my clothes in cold water and air dry pretty much all of them; I never use an air conditioner, using a fan to stay cool in the summer.

Too bad that, in total, all of the carbon emissions saved by doing any on those things was negated by one little trip to San Francisco. Cripes.

So Should I Not Have Gone in the First Place?

For the sake of argument not going is not on the table. Forgetting about the specific details and motivations for this particular trip, there are very good reasons to travel and benefits that transcend the statistics about carbon emissions and eco-footprint.

That's especially true if you're traveling and come away having learnt ways to make your life greener or otherwise enriched it, or if while traveling you exposed other people to your greener ways and they change their lives as a result.

In short, there is virtue in traveling (if not in flying itself) which means that until the time when biofuels make up the dominant aviation fuel (patience...) you need to look for ways to reduce the impact of your trip by not flying whenever possible.

How Could I Have Reduced the Impact of This Trip?

If you didn't already know, flying is the most carbon-intensive way to travel. Choosing alternatives is probably the best way to reduce the environmental impact of your trip.

A rough rule of thumb is that flying emits twice as much as taking the train or ten times taking a long-distance bus. It's nearly equal in emissions to driving long distance by yourself or twice as much as driving by yourself in a car with high fuel efficiency (think Prius efficiency here).

More concretely, taking the bus from New York City to San Francisco would only emit about 500 pounds of greenhouse gas emissions; the train emits about 2,400 pounds.

If you want to take the great American road trip all by your lonesome, driving straight across the entire continent, and have a car with average fuel economy, you've just emitted as much carbon in six days as you did as flying in six hours.

What about carbon offsets? Purchase a carbon offset for all the flights you have to take — I did for the trip used in this example, and do for all the flights I take — but don't treat them like a magical green incantation that allows you to keep up your jet-setting lifestyle guilt free.

We all should really consider the frequency of our travel, and the method of transport, seriously and take every step to reduce it whenever practical and green it where ever possible.

Oh, and when buying those carbon offsets, make sure you buy from someone doing reputable work. David Suzuki just released a carbon offset scorecard that's worth following.

More on Greener Travel
Eco-Friendly Travel
Stay at Green Hotels When You're on the Go
7 Steps to a Greener Road Trip